I have read or heard men using this passage though to say that they should not have to answer to a female boss in secular situations, including one who was in the military. That under no circumstances should a man have to do what a woman instructs them to do. They have applied it sweepingly to All Women as being sub to all males.

I have found that quite often those men who cite this Scripture as their reason for refusing to submit to women in authority generally refuse to submit to ANY authority, male or female.

This was written by Paul in response to discord in a particular Church caused by a small group of women, it is perhaps not the best approach but it is the approach he thought reasonable at the time. However, applying the ancient legal maxim 'cessante ratione legis cessat ipsa lex', as this particular situation in this particular Church no longer exists, the statement is void from a legal and canonical standpoint.

I have found that quite often those men who cite this Scripture as their reason for refusing to submit to women in authority generally refuse to submit to ANY authority, male or female.

There is that. But it's easier maybe to not 'submit' to women and seem reasonable somehow with using such things as this passage. It's "manly" or something and the reactions to such an attitude would be different then the speaker would get from, in effect, telling another male "I don't have to listen to you."

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

There are others including a few earlier writings. But only those few women who *had the advantage of literacy and education could make their ideas known more widely.*

May I ask if you have ever read the "Declaration of Sentiments" from the Seneca Falls Conference of 1848? It states in clear language just what some of the reasons for seeking rights for women. Again, these women could get this put out because they could read and write and had some education, and most of them were Christians to boot.http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/Senecafalls.html

Quote

Any example prior to 1800 couldn't be questioned. Let me reword my question. Can anyone give an example, outside of a monastery, of women serving in these ways?

In changing your question, I would like to ask does any Christian Church/denomination count or would only RC/EO be acceptable? if so, how common was it at that time for *lay Men* to read Scriptures in such services? Or was such a task reserved for clerics? What countries should any examples come from?

An example was given that some women *did* do the readings in certain settings in history. Why doesn't it happening in a monastery "count" please?

Quote

1. A woman reading Scripture or being a chanter goes against the plain meaning of the passage being discussed.

How so if the passage refers to women "asking" if they don't know something? "ask their husbands at home"

Quote

2. I'm skeptical of any change in the Church's behavior that conicides with a change in culture. That's why an example before 1800 would make me feel better. It would show that it's not the effect of our culture influencing the Church.[/color]

If I may reiterate, prior to 1800 literacy was not Universal in America, England or other countries. So that reduces the pool of readers.

How much change? What would constitute a period of not changing? Reading history shows that much of the time matters are not in a stasis.

I'm trying to refine a saying in my mind to the effect that "One person's "innovation" is anothers "organic development"" or something like that. It depends on if one likes it or not, maybe.

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

Bro, I've been around RC/EC and Orthodox parishes my whole life and never heard this argument. The only place I have seen it is on the internet.

Very true; the simple fact that certain members of the Church misunderstand our theology and tradition and instead attempt to impose upon us theology derived from the protestant methodology of sola scriptura does not imply that such theologies or theological approaches are condoned by the Church.

Very true; the simple fact that certain members of the Church misunderstand our theology and tradition and instead attempt to impose upon us theology derived from the protestant methodology of sola scriptura does not imply that such theologies or theological approaches are condoned by the Church.

Christodoulos, My source for the above quote is Fr. Theodore Stylianopoulos, in his class at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology. Fr. Ted is one of the foremost New Testament theologians and is a prolific author. What is your source, please?

God bless u !

My source......? The Holy Tradition of the Church,the writings of the Holy Scripture and the Holy Apostels and Fathers, Saints and Elders of the orthodox Church.

Do you want me to post quotes from these sources ? ( I am afraid people will get upset )

I know one personal experience: In a russian Church I went for Liturgy and when all went to venerate the Holy Cross and kiss the hand of the Priest and receive the Antidoron, one woman was without a Veil and the Parish Priest asked her why she has no cover and told her, that she is not allowed to kiss the cross without. She had to go without kissing it.

In some russian churches,where you can buy candles, they have some veils for women who come without and give it to them.

IN CHRIST

First Christian clothing shop for Orthodox women is to open in St Petersburg 8.11.2007

The first clothing store for Orthodox Christian women will open in November in St Petersburg. The idea to open the store belongs to Nadezhda Belkova-Bertrash, a wife of a priest. She is sure the shop will become popular with Christian women, who frequently can’t find appropriate long modest skirts for going to church in other stores.

Besides, the variety of beautiful virtuous clothing items displayed at the new store is going to ruin the common image of a buttoned up Orthodox Christian prayer, she says. ......

And is there any historical evidence (I am not demanding a citation, I'll take your word for it) or modern scholarly work (I would be quite interested in that) that addresses this judaizing tendency hypothesis?

One strong supporting piece of evidence for my position comes from the prayer that I cited here concerning miscarriage. Consider this passage, for example. (A similar passage exists in the "Prayer for a Woman on the First Day after Childbirth", and possibly in other places) : "And, according to Your great mercy as the Good God Who loves mankind, be merciful and forgive all those who are here present and who have touched her." The implication is clearly made in this passage that all who may have touched the woman during her perioid of "uncleanness" have been rendered ritually impure. Clearly, the people of God don't have to worry about ritual impurity anymore.

I know one personal experience: In a russian Church I went for Liturgy and when all went to venerate the Holy Cross and kiss the hand of the Priest and receive the Antidoron, one woman was without a Veil and the Parish Priest asked her why she has no cover and told her, that she is not allowed to kiss the cross without. She had to go without kissing it.

And yet Christ dined with tax collectors and allowed a prostitute to kiss him. Too bad this priest hasn't bothered to pay attention when he reads the Gospels, there really is some good stuff in there.

So far you've cited as your sources a Russian priest with no regard for the Gospel and various celibate monastics from the last 200 years. Do you have any real sources? (They are out there, I know of them, but it may take a bit of research on your part.)

Oh, and the problem isn't you citing sources, it's copy and pasting long texts. Give the relevant lines and a citation (author, book, and page number) and you won't annoy people, but cutting and pasting whole articles is something different entirely.

I know one personal experience: In a russian Church I went for Liturgy and when all went to venerate the Holy Cross and kiss the hand of the Priest and receive the Antidoron, one woman was without a Veil and the Parish Priest asked her why she has no cover and told her, that she is not allowed to kiss the cross without. She had to go without kissing it.

Luke 7: 36-39

Then one of the Pharisees asked Him to eat with him. And He went to the Pharisee's house, and sat down to eat. [37] And behold, a woman in the city who was a sinner, when she heard that Jesus sat at the table in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster flask of fragrant oil, [38] and stood at His feet behind Him weeping; and she began to wash His feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head; and she kissed His feet and anointed them with fragrant oil. [39] Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he spoke to himself, saying "This Man, if He were a prophet, would know who and what manner of woman this is who is touching Him; for she is a sinner."

« Last Edit: December 03, 2007, 02:33:40 AM by Riddikulus »

Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Then one of the Pharisees asked Him to eat with him. And He went to the Pharisee's house, and sat down to eat. [37] And behold, a woman in the city who was a sinner, when she heard that Jesus sat at the table in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster flask of fragrant oil, [38] and stood at His feet behind Him weeping; and she began to wash His feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head; and she kissed His feet and anointed them with fragrant oil. [39] Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he spoke to himself, saying "Thus Man, if He were a prophet, would know who and what manner of woman this is who is touching Him; for she is a sinner."

And what of the woman with the flow of blood who touched the hem of Jesus's robe? Did not Jesus heal her on the spot, though this woman's act made Him ritually unclean?

And what of the woman with the flow of blood who touched the hem of Jesus's robe? Did not Jesus heal her on the spot, though this woman's act made Him ritually unclean?

I always found this particular pericope to be most interesting due to the contradiction created: according to Jewish law, God himself became unclean...kinda defeats the purpose, don't you think? It certainly changes they way you look at these things.

I always found this particular pericope to be most interesting due to the contradiction created: according to Jewish law, God himself became unclean...kinda defeats the purpose, don't you think? It certainly changes they way you look at these things.

I remember my priest making this very point in his homily when this narrative came up in the Sunday Gospel reading a few weeks ago.

To keep the Tradition and the Rules of the Holy Church has nothing todo with Pharisee's.

I have to say, that Priest was right, he told her without anger or anything else, it is the duty of every Priest to keep the order and sanctity, in the Temple of God.

Christ came on earth to save the sinners, but he never blessed "sin", he also did not want to abolish he wants to fulfil. When you say a Prostitute kissed Christ -Christ did not bless prostitution,he said; Go and don't sin again; she repented ,there is a difference.

Did he not say that we should not even change one JOTA of the Law ? Did he not say in his parable that the servant who doesn't keep the small, how can he keep the great ?

Is not the Scripture full of advises to keep the Deposit ?

The problem is when we start to interprete these passages of our own, or ?

I don't know what you mean ( in a bit negative tone) celibate monastics of the last 200 years ? I think St. John Chrysostom is not of the last 200 years....and let me ask you; Do you think that the Church would follow this practice for about 2000 years, when it is only for Pharisee's, do you not see that it is a bit arrugant, to think we now know better ? But perhaps it is when people follow a "too academic theology" - Theology without ascesis is the Theology of the Deomons. St. Maximos; I only have to read what you are saying about the fasts......?

I know quotes, I don't have to search ( perhaps for the english translation ), but when you know them, why should I post ?

IN CHRIST

You and others present here, a very westernized, too academical, orthodoxy ( of the head ) !

To keep the Tradition and the Rules of the Holy Church has nothing todo with Pharisee's.

I have to say, that Priest was right, he told her without anger or anything else, it is the duty of every Priest to keep the order and sanctity, in the Temple of God.

Christ came on earth to save the sinners, but he never blessed "sin", he also did not want to abolish he wants to fulfil. When you say a Prostitute kissed Christ -Christ did not bless prostitution,he said; Go and don't sin again; she repented ,there is a difference.

Did he not say that we should not even change one JOTA of the Law ? Did he not say in his parable that the servant who doesn't keep the small, how can he keep the great ?

Is not the Scripture full of advises to keep the Deposit ?

The problem is when we start to interprete these passages of our own, or ?

I don't know what you mean ( in a bit negative tone) celibate monastics of the last 200 years ? I think St. John Chrysostom is not of the last 200 years....and let me ask you; Do you think that the Church would follow this practice for about 2000 years, when it is only for Pharisee's, do you not see that it is a bit arrugant, to think we now know better ? But perhaps it is when people follow a "too academic theology" - Theology without ascesis is the Theology of the Deomons. St. Maximos; I only have to read what you are saying about the fasts......?

I know quotes, I don't have to search ( perhaps for the english translation ), but when you know them, why should I post ?

IN CHRIST

You and others present here, a very westernized, too academical, orthodoxy ( of the head ) !

Gee, I'm so glad to know that you, in your great wisdom, have decided that we, the unholy, are too "westernized" and "academical" (which isn't even a word-- the word is "academic"). Note the sarcasm, please.

I was specifically quoting Fr. Theodore Stylianopoulos when I posted that St. Paul was speaking to a SPECIFIC problem in a SPECIFIC community at a SPECIFIC time. This is in NO way a new interpretation of the Gospel. And furthermore, if you are going to pass judgement on Fr. Ted's interpretation and teaching of this passage, I suggest you go and meet him and take his class first, as he is one of the most TRULY humble, pious people I have ever met, who can quote the fathers and the Gospel without giving it a second thought on any day of the week. And he doesn't just use them to support ultra-conservative, judgemental, negative positions... He actually uses them in the spirit that they were written... as holy words written for the education and edification of the people. Thus, I suggest you meet him before you decide that his interpretations are too "westernized" and "academical."

Furthermore, just because someone poses an interpretation that you don't agree with, or that might be slightly less strict and more accepting of people and their "sins" (since you seem to think it is a sin for a woman not to cover her head-- isn't it also a sin to pass judgement?), doesn't mean that they are too "westernized" or "academical." Theology, learning, and interpretation of the scriptures within the context of the church (which I daresay Fr. Ted is, since he teaches at the seminary) did NOT end with St. John Chrysostom, nor is it limited to monastics. I think St. John Chrysostom and all the saints would be terribly disappointed if they thought that we had stopped thinking and attemting to learn more about the scriptures/ Christ and just blindly accepted what people put in front of us! But maybe that's just me...

This is where I usually write, "I hope I'm not offending, please forgive me if I am." And while I do feel that way, I would like to point out that, of your last post, it really is the last sentence that I, personally, take offense to. Blindly passing judgement on those you don't agree with is not, IMHO, in the spirit of the good Christian discussion that this forum is for. Granted I'm new to this forum, but as one of my best friends is a moderator and I know him quite well, I know he would not be on a forum where such nasty judgements were the norm. I was very disappointed to read that this morning. I had hoped that, after being absent for a couple of days because of my schedule, I would come back and find a nice, healthy discussion continuing. Instead I find that I, and others that agree with me, are too "westernized" and "academical." By the way, you never did actually cite a source for what you claimed (about the Jewish tradition, etc.). I would still be interested in discussing that (sans judgements, of course).

God bless you. I pray we can continue this discussion without insulting and hurting eachother any further.

In Christ,Presbytera Mari

P.S. I have to agree that I do not think turning that young woman away was the way for that priest to go. In this day and age, he should be glad she came at all. I do not think it is the correct message to send to people that Christ will only love them and allow them into His Church if they're heads are covered. A more proper way to have handled it would have been to allow her to venerate the icon, and then privately take her aside and tell her that the tradition in that parish is for women to cover their heads and that, not wanting to see her leave, he would be happy to provide her with one. He should have showed kindness, patience, tolerance, and love, the way Christ does. Instead, the poor woman, who only wanted to venerate a holy icon, was met with judgement and was turned away, because she didn't follow a "law" (this does sound Pharisaic, in my opinion).

The Archbishop of Greece (who we should be praying for in his current illness) has brought thousands of young people back to the church by telling them NOT to worry about head coverings or how they dress at all(within reason, of course), and just come as they are. I think that is a beautiful thing! I would like to think that Christ would not want His children to stay away from Him or His Holy Church just because their heads are not covered...

Logged

Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.Matthew 18:5

A more proper way to have handled it would have been to allow her to venerate the icon, and then privately take her aside and tell her that the tradition in that parish is for women to cover their heads and that, not wanting to see her leave, he would be happy to provide her with one.

Dr. Karras often raises some legitimate points in her work. Unfortunately, partly through the testimony and argument of other scholars I have found her to be one who has an "axe to grind" in ways that make it difficult for me to trust her objectivity.

Someone -- I believe it was Christodoulos -- asked for examples of women serving in liturgical roles before 1800. I referenced the article because it provides details of three such examples from WAY before 1800. Everyone can make of that evidence what they will, but questioning the author's personal motivations for presenting the evidence does nothing to address the issue itself.

Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)

Gee, I'm so glad to know that you, in your great wisdom, have decided that we, the unholy, are too "westernized" and "academical" (which isn't even a word-- the word is "academic"). Note the sarcasm, please.

I was specifically quoting Fr. Theodore Stylianopoulos when I posted that St. Paul was speaking to a SPECIFIC problem in a SPECIFIC community at a SPECIFIC time. This is in NO way a new interpretation of the Gospel. And furthermore, if you are going to pass judgement on Fr. Ted's interpretation and teaching of this passage, I suggest you go and meet him and take his class first, as he is one of the most TRULY humble, pious people I have ever met, who can quote the fathers and the Gospel without giving it a second thought on any day of the week. And he doesn't just use them to support ultra-conservative, judgemental, negative positions... He actually uses them in the spirit that they were written... as holy words written for the education and edification of the people. Thus, I suggest you meet him before you decide that his interpretations are too "westernized" and "academical."

Furthermore, just because someone poses an interpretation that you don't agree with, or that might be slightly less strict and more accepting of people and their "sins" (since you seem to think it is a sin for a woman not to cover her head-- isn't it also a sin to pass judgement?), doesn't mean that they are too "westernized" or "academical." Theology, learning, and interpretation of the scriptures within the context of the church (which I daresay Fr. Ted is, since he teaches at the seminary) did NOT end with St. John Chrysostom, nor is it limited to monastics. I think St. John Chrysostom and all the saints would be terribly disappointed if they thought that we had stopped thinking and attemting to learn more about the scriptures/ Christ and just blindly accepted what people put in front of us! But maybe that's just me...

This is where I usually write, "I hope I'm not offending, please forgive me if I am." And while I do feel that way, I would like to point out that, of your last post, it really is the last sentence that I, personally, take offense to. Blindly passing judgement on those you don't agree with is not, IMHO, in the spirit of the good Christian discussion that this forum is for. Granted I'm new to this forum, but as one of my best friends is a moderator and I know him quite well, I know he would not be on a forum where such nasty judgements were the norm. I was very disappointed to read that this morning. I had hoped that, after being absent for a couple of days because of my schedule, I would come back and find a nice, healthy discussion continuing. Instead I find that I, and others that agree with me, are too "westernized" and "academical." By the way, you never did actually cite a source for what you claimed (about the Jewish tradition, etc.). I would still be interested in discussing that (sans judgements, of course).

God bless you. I pray we can continue this discussion without insulting and hurting eachother any further.

In Christ,Presbytera Mari

P.S. I have to agree that I do not think turning that young woman away was the way for that priest to go. In this day and age, he should be glad she came at all. I do not think it is the correct message to send to people that Christ will only love them and allow them into His Church if they're heads are covered. A more proper way to have handled it would have been to allow her to venerate the icon, and then privately take her aside and tell her that the tradition in that parish is for women to cover their heads and that, not wanting to see her leave, he would be happy to provide her with one. He should have showed kindness, patience, tolerance, and love, the way Christ does. Instead, the poor woman, who only wanted to venerate a holy icon, was met with judgement and was turned away, because she didn't follow a "law" (this does sound Pharisaic, in my opinion).

The Archbishop of Greece (who we should be praying for in his current illness) has brought thousands of young people back to the church by telling them NOT to worry about head coverings or how they dress at all(within reason, of course), and just come as they are. I think that is a beautiful thing! I would like to think that Christ would not want His children to stay away from Him or His Holy Church just because their heads are not covered...

God bless !

When a person comes to Church improper ( man or woman) the whole parish is blamed and not only one Person. I think the Priest was acting the right way, I thank God that there are some few Priests left ,with zeal for his Holy Church.

In a Parish were people are dressed improper I would not go for Liturgy - that's my opinion.

But with westernized, academic ....I did not think of Fr. Ted !

Nice to remind (insult - when you think this is proper behavier for a Matjuschka) me of my bad grammar and orthography ( but I will not change it- it is not important) !

In CHRIST

Your post is nothing "new" here, there are many modernists but some traditional too.

Someone -- I believe it was Christodoulos -- asked for examples of women serving in liturgical roles before 1800. I referenced the article because it provides details of three such examples from WAY before 1800. Everyone can make of that evidence what they will, but questioning the author's personal motivations for presenting the evidence does nothing to address the issue itself.

When a person comes to Church improper ( man or woman) the whole parish is blamed and not only one Person. I think the Priest was acting the right way, I thank God that there are some few Priests left ,with zeal for his Holy Church.

Blamed? Blamed for what and by whom?

Quote from: Christodoulos

In a Parish were people are dressed improper I would not go for Liturgy - that's my opinion.

Define "improper" and then explain by what authority you decide what is proper and improper. Then describe to me what it is like to attend the Divine Liturgy amongst only those who are as perfect as you.

Quote from: Christodoulos

Nice to remind (insult - when you think this is proper behavier for a Matjuschka) me of my bad grammar and orthography ( but I will not change it- it is not important) !

In CHRIST

Your post is nothing "new" here, there are many modernists but some traditional too.

Your concern over insults is ironic given your propensity for slinging them.

When a person comes to Church improper ( man or woman) the whole parish is in blamed and not only one Person. I think the Priest accted the right way, I thank God that there are some few Priests left with zeal for his Holy Church.

In a Parish were people are dressed improper I would not go for Liturgy - that's my opinion.

But with westernized, academic ....I did not think of Fr. Ted !

Nice to remind me of my bad grammar and orthography ( but I will not change it- it is not important) !

In CHRIST

Your post is nothing "new" here, there are many mondernists but some traditional too.

Christodoulos,

I did not come to this forum to make enemies, and I pray that I have not made one of you. I am sorry that you find my positions so modernist and unacceptable, but I hope you realize that I don't plan to change them simply because you condemn them.

That being said, minus your condemnations of me, I enjoy hearing (*reading*) your opinion on topics like these if for no other reason than because it causes me to think about my own opinion and either defend or change it. I thank you for this, and I pray that we can continue to discuss important matters on this forum. I pray on topics where we disagree, that we may just agree to disagree and go forward without condemnations and judgements of eachother. And on topics where we agree, I pray we can come to eachother's defense and unite in our agreement!

And please forgive me for criticizing your orthography, you are right. Though it was not meant as an insult, I guess it was not nice of me. It was said out of anger and hurt that you had condemned me so harshly.

With all that said, I am going to attempt to continue the discussion and pray that I won't offend you again...

I am sad to hear you say that you would not go to liturgy if people are dressed improperly. Wouldn't you want to forgive their improprieties and continue on your journey to salvation? Or is it because you find such things distracting? I'm asking seriously, not sarcastically, because I am always interested to hear why men are so concerned about topics having to do with womens' dress and conduct in church (such as head coverings or receiving communion while menstruating). I mean this as a serious question on which I would like to hear (*read* your opinion.

God bless you for being so committed in your faith!

Logged

Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.Matthew 18:5

Define "improper" and then explain by what authority you decide what is proper and improper. Then describe to me what it is like to attend the Divine Liturgy amongst only those who are as perfect as you.

Your concern over insults is ironic given your propensity for slinging them.

When a person comes to Church improper ( man or woman) the whole parish is blamed and not only one Person. I think the Priest was acting the right way, I thank God that there are some few Priests left ,with zeal for his Holy Church.

In a Parish were people are dressed improper I would not go for Liturgy - that's my opinion.

But with westernized, academic ....I did not think of Fr. Ted !

Nice to remind (insult - when you think this is proper behavier for a Matjuschka) me of my bad grammar and orthography ( but I will not change it- it is not important) !

In CHRIST

Your post is nothing "new" here, there are many modernists but some traditional too.

By the way, I am going to choose to ignore the fact that you edited this post to add your condemnation of me. It is clear that you think I am not a good Presbytera. As I said in my above post, I am sad to hear that, especially since you have never met me...

Logged

Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.Matthew 18:5

I did not come to this forum to make enemies, and I pray that I have not made one of you. I am sorry that you find my positions so modernist and unacceptable, but I hope you realize that I don't plan to change them simply because you condemn them.

That being said, minus your condemnations of me, I enjoy hearing (*reading*) your opinion on topics like these if for no other reason than because it causes me to think about my own opinion and either defend or change it. I thank you for this, and I pray that we can continue to discuss important matters on this forum. I pray on topics where we disagree, that we may just agree to disagree and go forward without condemnations and judgements of eachother. And on topics where we agree, I pray we can come to eachother's defense and unite in our agreement!

And please forgive me for criticizing your orthography, you are right. Though it was not meant as an insult, I guess it was not nice of me. It was said out of anger and hurt that you had condemned me so harshly.

With all that said, I am going to attempt to continue the discussion and pray that I won't offend you again...

I am sad to hear you say that you would not go to liturgy if people are dressed improperly. Wouldn't you want to forgive their improprieties and continue on your journey to salvation? Or is it because you find such things distracting? I'm asking seriously, not sarcastically, because I am always interested to hear why men are so concerned about topics having to do with womens' dress and conduct in church (such as head coverings or receiving communion while menstruating). I mean this as a serious question on which I would like to hear (*read* your opinion.

God bless you for being so committed in your faith!

God bless !

I did not address your post when I wrote academic and westernized, I meant another poster.

When you read my post you will see, that I want all people to be proper dressed ( both man and woman ) but you are right, like I have written, often I could read about women and proper dress code but seldom about men.

For me improper dress in Church is blasphemy, the Temple of God is not the beach. When we celebrate Holy and Divine Liturgy with the Angels and Saints and worship God, when we drink his Allholy Blood and eat his Allpure Flesh and the Cherubim and Seraphim are prostrating and trembling -how can we dishonor the Sanctity of the Holy Church - please forgive me- but I can not accept this.

And I know some cases when the Theotokos and Saints told Elders that God is angered by these things.

In CHRIST

From Hieromonk Averky:

There is a story that I read just a few years ago from a little pamphlet that I found in the back of monastic church about a very devout Russian woman in Australia who could not always attend a Russian Orthodox church, but more often attended another Orthodox church at which most of the women never covered their heads. She was known for her full and beautiful hair, but she always kept it covered. She noticed this, and not judging anyone, she made a promise to the Most Pure Theotokos that she would always keep her head covered and dress modestly whenever she attended Divine Services. After some time, it was determined that she had a dangerous form of cancer and would have to undergo chemotherapy and radiation treatments. Like anyone, she was very frightened, and turned to the Mother of God with intense prayer and tears. Once while she was praying before her icon of the Pure Virgin, she heard a sweet and comforting voice, which said to her, "My dear child, because you have always shown me love and respect, my Divine Son has granted you healing, but only after a time. Because you have honored me by always keeping your head covered, you will not lose one strand of your hair." And all came true; to cleanse her soul, God permitted her to suffer for a time, but despite intensive therapy, her hair remained intact.

I did not address your post when I wrote academic and westernized, I meant another poster.

When you read my post you will see, that I want all people to be proper dressed ( both man and woman ) but you are right, like I have written, often I could read about women and proper dress code but seldom about men.

For me improper dress in Church is blasphemy, the Temple of God is not the beach. When we celebrate Holy and Divine Liturgy with the Angels and Saints and worship God, when we drink his Allholy Blood and eat his Allpure Flesh and the Cherubim and Seraphim are prostrating and trembling -how can we dishonor the Sanctity of the Holy Church - please forgive me- but I can not accept this.

And I know some cases when the Theotokos and Saints told Elders that God is angered by these things.

In CHRIST

From Hieromonk Averky:

There is a story that I read just a few years ago from a little pamphlet that I found in the back of monastic church about a very devout Russian woman in Australia who could not always attend a Russian Orthodox church, but more often attended another Orthodox church at which most of the women never covered their heads. She was known for her full and beautiful hair, but she always kept it covered. She noticed this, and not judging anyone, she made a promise to the Most Pure Theotokos that she would always keep her head covered and dress modestly whenever she attended Divine Services. After some time, it was determined that she had a dangerous form of cancer and would have to undergo chemotherapy and radiation treatments. Like anyone, she was very frightened, and turned to the Mother of God with intense prayer and tears. Once while she was praying before her icon of the Pure Virgin, she heard a sweet and comforting voice, which said to her, "My dear child, because you have always shown me love and respect, my Divine Son has granted you healing, but only after a time. Because you have honored me by always keeping your head covered, you will not lose one strand of your hair." And all came true; to cleanse her soul, God permitted her to suffer for a time, but despite intensive therapy, her hair remained intact.

I know many such stories !

This is a beautiful story, and I thank you for sharing it with me! It gives me cause to think...

Logged

Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.Matthew 18:5

Through the will of God, the account of this miracle, which took place 24 years ago [1965], has reached America. It's authenticity is verified by the fact that it records the year, day, hour, city, address, names... etc. Reading it, we behold the great care which God has for the salvation of our sinful souls..........

Then the Mother of God was near me and I found myself again on that small platform, but now, instead of lying down, I was standing up. The Queen of heaven said: "Lord, how can I release her, she has short hair!?"....

The Lord said: "Put a braid, the same color as her own hair, in her right hand."

......

The Lord said: "Let her go back to earth. Take hold of her hair and set her free

....

She answered that it was essential that I not fall, and she put the thick end of the braid of hair in my right hand. When she let go of it I flew toward earth.

I did not address your post when I wrote academic and westernized, I meant another poster.

When you read my post you will see, that I want all people to be proper dressed ( both man and woman ) but you are right, like I have written, often I could read about women and proper dress code but seldom about men.

For me improper dress in Church is blasphemy, the Temple of God is not the beach. When we celebrate Holy and Divine Liturgy with the Angels and Saints and worship God, when we drink his Allholy Blood and eat his Allpure Flesh and the Cherubim and Seraphim are prostrating and trembling -how can we dishonor the Sanctity of the Holy Church - please forgive me- but I can not accept this.

And I know some cases when the Theotokos and Saints told Elders that God is angered by these things.

In CHRIST

From Hieromonk Averky:

There is a story that I read just a few years ago from a little pamphlet that I found in the back of monastic church about a very devout Russian woman in Australia who could not always attend a Russian Orthodox church, but more often attended another Orthodox church at which most of the women never covered their heads. She was known for her full and beautiful hair, but she always kept it covered. She noticed this, and not judging anyone, she made a promise to the Most Pure Theotokos that she would always keep her head covered and dress modestly whenever she attended Divine Services. After some time, it was determined that she had a dangerous form of cancer and would have to undergo chemotherapy and radiation treatments. Like anyone, she was very frightened, and turned to the Mother of God with intense prayer and tears. Once while she was praying before her icon of the Pure Virgin, she heard a sweet and comforting voice, which said to her, "My dear child, because you have always shown me love and respect, my Divine Son has granted you healing, but only after a time. Because you have honored me by always keeping your head covered, you will not lose one strand of your hair." And all came true; to cleanse her soul, God permitted her to suffer for a time, but despite intensive therapy, her hair remained intact.

I know many such stories !

I am very pleased to read your posts on this matter so far and this wonderful story is a blessing and caused me to make this post.

From what I have read you are very conservative and seem to be very strong on pushing others to understand YOUR conservativeness which people seem to take as you condeming THEM for being less conservative and not agreeing with you.

I do not think you are condeming anyone.

I hope and pray that all of us orthodox can learn to get back to our true roots; particularly our preciuos women whom over the millenia has been the safe keepers of our most solemn charateristics and traditions.

Continue to try to maintain what our fathers brought us.

Sadly today among us orthodox you will not find much company.

It seems that WE are getting more and more 'wordly' as the generations go by especially and maybe largely due to those of us who have become Americanized and look back at the "olde" country as "backward" and old-fashioned.

Reading the various posts on this thread seems to clearly show that the orthodox world (that is to mean its people only since the Holy Church will not and can not change) is morphing into something. I can not imagine what it will be. But it at this point looks like protestantism. Thus we are starting to look like and act like protestants; thus we are not far from thinking like them and who knows whats next.

The Panhagia told her; " Take a stick and speak. Talk about short skirts. Talk about apostasy. Preach repetence."

"I can't, my Panhagia. They don't listen," she replied.

The Mother of God chided her: " You must speak. Do not cease giving advice."

The Panhagia said: " Tell the People to keep the fasts, to keep Wednesday and Friday fasts....Not to eat. To go to Church regulary...Not to wear immodest clothing to Church. To dress humbly.

Eldress said: ....Be careful not to tempt men. No short sleeves, not short dresses, no short hair. The Panhagia is angered by these things.....

One vacationer, a scientist and physician, went to the monstery with her parents on a pilgrimage. This girl was wearing shorts; she had no respect for the sanctity of the place.

"My dear, don't go inside wearing such clothing. It's a sin," the ascetic lovingly and humbly advised her. " Put on a dress."The doctor was outraged: " Get lost, you old hag ! Who are you to tell me what to do?Well, I never. This stutterer this scarecrow that scares me even to look at, is going to tell me what to do ?"The wretched woman made her way down to the church. Did her impiety remain unpunished ? She tripped and fell ! She fractured her foot, and they took her away on a stretcher.

There is a story that I read just a few years ago from a little pamphlet that I found in the back of monastic church about a very devout Russian woman in Australia who could not always attend a Russian Orthodox church, but more often attended another Orthodox church at which most of the women never covered their heads. She was known for her full and beautiful hair, but she always kept it covered. She noticed this, and not judging anyone, she made a promise to the Most Pure Theotokos that she would always keep her head covered and dress modestly whenever she attended Divine Services. After some time, it was determined that she had a dangerous form of cancer and would have to undergo chemotherapy and radiation treatments. Like anyone, she was very frightened, and turned to the Mother of God with intense prayer and tears. Once while she was praying before her icon of the Pure Virgin, she heard a sweet and comforting voice, which said to her, "My dear child, because you have always shown me love and respect, my Divine Son has granted you healing, but only after a time. Because you have honored me by always keeping your head covered, you will not lose one strand of your hair." And all came true; to cleanse her soul, God permitted her to suffer for a time, but despite intensive therapy, her hair remained intact.

The Panhagia told her; " Take a stick and speak. Talk about short skirts. Talk about apostasy. Preach repetence."

"I can't, my Panhagia. They don't listen," she replied.

The Mother of God chided her: " You must speak. Do not cease giving advice."

The Panhagia said: " Tell the People to keep the fasts, to keep Wednesday and Friday fasts....Not to eat. To go to Church regulary...Not to wear immodest clothing to Church. To dress humbly.

Eldress said: ....Be careful not to tempt men. No short sleeves, not short dresses, no short hair. The Panhagia is angered by these things.....

One vacationer, a scientist and physician, went to the monstery with her parents on a pilgrimage. This girl was wearing shorts; she had no respect for the sanctity of the place.

"My dear, don't go inside wearing such clothing. It's a sin," the ascetic lovingly and humbly advised her. " Put on a dress."The doctor was outraged: " Get lost, you old hag ! Who are you to tell me what to do?Well, I never. This stutterer this scarecrow that scares me even to look at, is going to tell me what to do ?"The wretched woman made her way down to the church. Did her impiety remain unpunished ? She tripped and fell ! She fractured her foot, and they took her away on a stretcher.

These myths are the basis of your theology? And you wonder why we don't take you seriously? I've heard the same types of myths from protestants for years in order to justify some of the strangest beliefs, sorry I don't buy it. And, frankly, I find it quite frightening that there's at least a slim chance you're taking yourself seriously (not even I go so far as to take myself seriously ).

Define "improper" and then explain by what authority you decide what is proper and improper. Then describe to me what it is like to attend the Divine Liturgy amongst only those who are as perfect as you.

Your concern over insults is ironic given your propensity for slinging them.

Carole

HI

Please note that the authority to determine or judge what is or is not proper among the true faithful or as we say the "orthodox" is in the hand of you and me and all of us who are Christ's servants and protectors of the faith.

You are charged with protecting the 'truth' which you stand for as a true Christian. It is who you are.....

Thus you dress like the truth you stand for and protect.

Thus you go about life in accordance with the truth inside you.

When I say you I mean all of us.

This is very complicated for those who need more background on Godly attire and the spritual doors which are opened and closed for such attire.

I will give this small piece:

Adam and Eve were in the Garden prior to sin and were 'clothed' or not?

Most will say "not" as to say they were naked.

This is correct.

But there is more information left to digest.

Adam and Eve were naked but they did not 'know' it. Why? because the were "CLOTHED' with light. Light so bright that the could not see there own naked flesh.

After sinning; the light was lost and thus their naked flesh was revealed to them. God then fashioned for them garments of sin or wordly clothing. As such the garden was improper for such behavior and the resulting (sinful) attire and they were banished from the garden and placed out of it and into the world along with satan and his angels.

Christ as the second Adam (meaning beautiful) is the new light, that heavenly light which is blinding to the eye. His light is the original garments of Adam...Adams first garments which were and are Holy. WE are all in Christ and thus are privilledged to wear the Holy garments of brilliiant light walking in the world among all men being seen only in the light of Christ. Christ said His children are the light of the world.

This is where I stop.

I assure you that I can go on for pages.

I want you to try and see yourself as an angelic figure a Holy person (which you really are) not by your own ability by permission. If you can do that than you can see that attire is paramount to us on earth as orthodox.

We are the true beleivers and thus are the gate keepers so to speak and have the authority of the Holy Spirit to speak to the world and to each other the mesage of God and the gifts of hope he gave and gives.

So yes you can judge me with truth and I you.

If you see me at your wedding feast with dirty jeans and grimmy work boots you may kindly put me out. I may be hurt by that but I knew that I was going to a wedding feast; it was my own slackness to not have taken the proper readiness to not offend the host of the wedding and wear attire fitting the occassion.

I also can not over dress so as to speak too loudly of myself and thus anger and or embarrass the host of the wedding feast with my apparent diregard evident in the bravodo of my oppulent and excessive presentation. This may cause my dismissal as well.

Christ has prepared His wedding feast on the Cross of Calvary so that WE may all have a place at His table. So Please come and bring a friend.

But please dress for the day and not for the night and if you are a women cover your blessed head 'modestly' and wear no adornments or jewels or make-up and such so as not to over shine the beauty of the Bride or distract others from Her beauty who is the Queen and center most of the feast; where by such error you make offense to Her.....she is 'The Church of Christ'..His chosen Bride. ALL eyes are to be on her ONLY!

I am not sure if I am being clear here but thats the best I can right now in a short order.

Covering your head is a Holy matter. It is not for all women.

Heaven is not for all Christians either.

Please wear what you like if thats what you prefer.

But the gentlemen whose authority you question has offered you a blessing. Not by himself but in behalf of Christ and as far as I am concerned he had / has the authority to make the point to you and us all.

Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered disgraceth his head.

But every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered disgraceth her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven.

For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, let her cover her head.

You yourselves judge. Doth it become a woman to pray unto God uncovered?

Is the Scripture not clear enaugh ?: Every man and every woman

Clemens of Alexandria:Paedagogos

Going to ChurchWoman and man are to go to church decently attired, with natural step, embracing silence, possessing unfeigned love, pure in body, pure in heart, fit to pray to God. Let the woman observe this, further. Let her be entirely covered, unless she happen to be at home. For that style of dress is grave, and protects from being gazed at. And she will never fall, who puts before her eyes modesty, and her shawl; nor will she invite another to fall into sin by uncovering her face. For this is the wish of the Word, since it is becoming for her to pray veiled.They say that the wife of Æneas, through excess of propriety, did not, even in her terror at the capture of Troy, uncover herself; but, though fleeing from the conflagration, remained veiled.

Apostolic constitutions:

......But thou who designest to be faithful to thine own husband, take care to please him alone. And when thou art in the streets, cover thy head; for by such a covering thou wilt avoid being viewed of idle persons. Do not paint thy face, which is God's workmanship; for there is no part of thee which wants ornament, inasmuch as all things which God has made are very good. But the lascivious additional adorning of what is already good is an affront to the bounty of the Creator. Look downward when thou walkest abroad, veiling thyself as becomes women.

Tertullian:

On Prayer:

But, withal, the declaration is plain: "Every woman," says he, "praying and prophesying with head uncovered, dishonours her own head." 1 Corinthians 11:5 What is "every woman," but woman of every age, of every rank, of every condition? By saying "every" he excepts nought of womanhood, just as he excepts nought of manhood either from not being covered; for just so he says, "Every man." 1 Corinthians 11:4 As, then, in the masculine sex, under the name of "man" even the "youth" is forbidden to be veiled; so, too, in the feminine, under the name of "woman," even the "virgin" is bidden to be veiled......

Ón the Veiling of Virigins

An Appeal to the Married Women chapt.17

But we admonish you, too, women of the second (degree of) modesty, who have fallen into wedlock, not to outgrow so far the discipline of the veil, not even in a moment of an hour, as, because you cannot refuse it, to take some other means to nullify it, by going neither covered nor bare. For some, with their turbans and woollen bands, do not veil their head, but bind it up; protected, indeed, in front, but, where the head properly lies, bare. Others are to a certain extent covered over the region of the brain with linen coifs of small dimensions—I suppose for fear of pressing the head—and not reaching quite to the ears. If they are so weak in their hearing as not to be able to hear through a covering, I pity them. Let them know that the whole head constitutes "the woman." Its limits and boundaries reach as far as the place where the robe begins. The region of the veil is co-extensive with the space covered by the hair when unbound; in order that the necks too may be encircled. For it is they which must be subjected, for the sake of which "power" ought to be "had on the head:" the veil is their yoke.

To us the Lord has, even by revelations, measured the space for the veil to extend over. For a certain sister of ours was thus addressed by an angel, beating her neck, as if in applause: "Elegant neck, and deservedly bare! it is well for you to unveil yourself from the head right down to the loins, lest withal this freedom of your neck profit you not!" And, of course, what you have said to one you have said to all. But how severe a chastisement will they likewise deserve, who, amid (the recital of) the Psalms, and at any mention of (the name of) God, continue uncovered; (who) even when about to spend time in prayer itself, with the utmost readiness place a fringe, or a tuft, or any thread whatever, on the crown of their heads, and suppose themselves to be covered?

St. John Chrysostomos,hom in Cor

For He it is Who created Nature. When therefore you overturn these boundaries, see how great injuries ensue.

And tell me not this, that the error is but small. For first, it is great even of itself: being as it is disobedience.

"Every woman that prays or prophesies with her head unveiled, dishonors her head," he stayed not at this point only, but also proceeded to say, "for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven." But if to be shaven is always dishonorable, it is plain too that being uncovered is always a reproach. And not even with this only was he content, but added again, saying, "The woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels." He signifies that not at the time of prayer only but also continually, she ought to be covered. But with regard to the man, it is no longer about covering but about wearing long hair, that he so forms his discourse. To be covered he then only forbids, when a man is praying; but the wearing long hair he discourages at all times. Wherefore, as touching the woman, he said, "But if she be not veiled, let her also be shorn;" so likewise touching the man, "If he have long hair, it is a dishonor unto him." He said not, "if he be covered" but, "if he have long hair." Wherefore also he said at the beginning, "Every man praying or prophesying, having any thing on his head, dishonors his head." He said not, "covered," but "having any thing on his head;" signifying that even though he pray with the head bare, yet if he have long hair, he is like to one covered. "For the hair," says he, "is given for a covering."

For me improper dress in Church is blasphemy, the Temple of God is not the beach. When we celebrate Holy and Divine Liturgy with the Angels and Saints and worship God, when we drink his Allholy Blood and eat his Allpure Flesh and the Cherubim and Seraphim are prostrating and trembling -how can we dishonor the Sanctity of the Holy Church - please forgive me- but I can not accept this.

It's amazing just how many "near death experiences" orthodoxinfo uses to justify it's "traditionalist" teachings:

Quote

Masturbation:Another teenage boy also fell to the sin of self-abuse and, again out of shame, failed to confess it to his spiritual Father. It so happened that he contracted a fatal disease and was dying. His family sent word to the boys Confessor about his condition, but were unable to find him before the boy died. At the time of his death, the young man's soul was seized by two horrible demons, which began to drag him to a place of terrible torment. In the meantime, the boys spiritual Father arrived at his home and found the grieving family. If you had come earlier, they cried, you might have prevented his death. Please, please bring him back. The Priest began to pray and, lo, a miracle occurred. The boy indeed returned to life.http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/selfabuse.aspx

Abortion:When she was young and newly married, some 35 years before, she became pregnant at a time when her family was in the greatest financial straits. The other members of the family pressed her to have an abortion, but she refused absolutely. Eventually, however, due to the threats of her mother-in-law, she gave in against her will, and the operation was performed. The medical supervision of the illicit operation was very primitive with the result that she caught a serious infection, and within the space of a few days died, without being able to confess her sin.

At the moment of death, which occurred in the evening, she felt her soul part from the body in the way that is usually described; her soul remained nearby and watched the body being washed, clothed and placed in the coffin. In the morning, she followed the procession to the church, watched the funeral, and saw the coffin loaded into the hearse for transfer to the cemetery. The soul was as though flying a small height above the body.

Suddenly there appeared in the road two "deacons," as she described them, in shining white sticharia and oraria. One of them was reading a scroll. As the car approached, he held up his hand, and the car ground to a halt. The driver got out to see what was wrong with the motor, and in the meanwhile the angels started to converse. The one holding the scroll which was clearly the record of her sins, looked up from his reading and said: "It is sad, she has a very serious sin on her list, and is bound for hell, since she did not confess it." "Yes," said the other, "but it is a pity that she should be punished, as she did not want to do it, but was forced into it by her family." "Very well," replied the First, "the only thing to do is to send her back to be able to confess her sin and repent of it."http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/death/death_metcyp.aspx

It seems that a cult of the dead is an integral part of this sort of "traditionalism", which seems to me to be appropriate, since "traditionalism", (as compared to Tradition) is in fact a dead faith.

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

These myths are the basis of your theology? And you wonder why we don't take you seriously? I've heard the same types of myths from protestants for years in order to justify some of the strangest beliefs, sorry I don't buy it. And, frankly, I find it quite frightening that there's at least a slim chance you're taking yourself seriously (not even I go so far as to take myself seriously ).

God bless !

You are not objective and fair again.

Read this "myths" and believe them or not - I never said you must believe them !

But of course "westernized and academic" people like you can not believe them. But why not throw out all the myths like resurrection of the dead, miracles of Christ, ascension,.......are they also myths for you ? How far have you gone from the true experience of Christ ? Go on with your academic search - I hope for you, that you not fall in delusion .......many have gone astray for being too academic...

And yet Christ dined with tax collectors and allowed a prostitute to kiss him. Too bad this priest hasn't bothered to pay attention when he reads the Gospels, there really is some good stuff in there.

So far you've cited as your sources a Russian priest with no regard for the Gospel and various celibate monastics from the last 200 years. Do you have any real sources? (They are out there, I know of them, but it may take a bit of research on your part.)

Oh, and the problem isn't you citing sources, it's copy and pasting long texts. Give the relevant lines and a citation (author, book, and page number) and you won't annoy people, but cutting and pasting whole articles is something different entirely.

For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, let her cover her head.

Don't you see that your position is purely cultural without any theological basis form this quote of yours? In our culture it is certainly not a shame for a woman to have short hair or be bald; granted, some may have aesthetic objections, but that's the extent of it. So using the logic of your post, since it is not a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, there's no need for her to cover her head.

That choice is God's not yours to make, this priest was wrong and ignorant and, dare I say if the apocryphal story is to be believed, prideful and full of sin. I will not renounce truth because of your cultural expectations; it is the God given right of every human being to exercise their faith and hold their opinions in accordance with the dictates of their conscience.

So condemn me to hell if you must; if this is enough to send me there, then it's a done deal, I'll start getting my visa approved.

The irony in the context of this thread being that the Panagia was telling a woman to teach in Church.....

God bless !

Not in Church - but she should advise people- there is no problem with ......also St. Euphemia of Serbia went from town to town and preached to people....she was blessed by the Bishop to to.

And all the other woman Saints: Like St. Thekla the equal to the Apostels, St. Nina, St. Mary Magdalene,.........so nothing new...

In CHRIST

These "stories", you called them myths ( your sin ), I posted because perhaps some people want to read them, not as evidence for the teaching of the church. The Teaching is based on the Scripture,Tradition ( for 2000 years) the Fathers, Apostolic writings.......so these experiences ( there are many others) are only to demonstrate the truth of the Church. When you once will be judged, you can make no excuses for not knowing- now you have read.